Mundy House

Updated 22 April 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 11 March 2021 and was announced.

Updated 22 April 2021

Mundy House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Mundy House provides care and support for up to 58 people, some of whom may be living with dementia. At the time of our inspection, 51 people were using the service. The service is set over two floors in the local community.

At the last inspection, the service was Good. At this inspection, the service remained Good.

A registered manager had been in post for a number of years. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The service was safe. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. People’s needs were met by sufficient numbers of staff. There were systems in place to minimise the risk of infection. People’s medicines were dispensed by staff who had received training and were competent to do so.

The service was effective. People were cared for and supported by staff who were well trained and understood how to support people to meet their needs. The registered manager had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People had access to a balanced diet and were supported to eat and drink in a safe way. Referrals to other health professionals were made when required. The environment was appropriately designed and adapted to meet people’s needs.

The service was caring. People were cared for by staff who were kind and compassionate towards them. Staff had a good understanding of people’s preferences of care. Staff always worked hard to promote people’s independence through encouraging and supporting people to make informed decisions.

The service was responsive. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis, and people and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care. People were supported to follow their interests and participate in social activities. The registered manager responded to complaints received in a timely manner. People were provided with the appropriate care and support at the end of their life.

The service was well-led. The service had systems in place to monitor and provide good care. These were reviewed on a regular basis. Staff, people and their relatives spoke very highly of the registered manager. The registered manager had good links with the local community and looked at ways they could participate in activities that promoted good practice.